This
matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Russell G.
Vineyard's Final Report, Recommendation, and Order [6]
(“Final R&R”). The Final R&R recommends
that (1) Plaintiff Melanie Tyler's (“Tyler”)
claims against Defendant Shapiro Pendergast & Hasty
(“Shapiro”) be dismissed for lack of service, (2)
Defendant Nationstar Mortgage LLC's
(“Nationstar”) Motion to Dismiss [3] be granted
as to Plaintiff's federal RESPA claim, and (3) that the
Court decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over
Tyler's state law claims against Nationstar. The Court
finds no plain error in the Final R&R and adopts the
recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff
filed this lawsuit to enjoin the foreclosure of her residence
located in DeKalb County, Georgia. ([1.1]). Nationstar is the
assignee of a Security Deed for a loan secured by the
residence. The foreclosure sale was scheduled to occur on
July 5, 2017.

On June
29, 2017, Plaintiff filed the instant action against
defendants Nationstar and Shapiro in the Superior Court of
Gwinnett County, Georgia. ([1.1]). In her complaint,
Plaintiff alleges that “[d]efendants are duly appointed
agent and attorney in fact for [her]” and that they,
“by conducting Foreclosing proceedings on [her]
property without exhausting all loss mitigation remedies
available and not following Federal or State Loss Mitigation
regulations in order to avoid foreclosure on [her] property[,
] ha[ve] breached Fiduciary Duties per Georgia Code §
11-3-307.” ([1.1] at 6 ¶ 7). Plaintiff seeks a
declaration of rights and a declaratory judgment pursuant to
O.C.G.A. § 9-4-1 et. seq. that
“[d]efendants have breached Fiduciary Duties per
Georgia code § 11-3-307 because [they] are duly
appointed agent and attorney in fact for [her] and by
conducting foreclosure proceedings on [her] property without
exhausting all loss mitigation remedies available and not
following Federal or State Loss Mitigation regulations and
not complying with Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12
U.S.C. § 2605(e) [(‘RESPA')] and pursuant to
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) mortgage
servicing rules issued on January 17, 2013, with an effective
date of January 10, 2014.” ([1.1] at 6 ¶ 12).
Plaintiff requests that the Court declare that
“[d]efendants are required to evaluate [her] for
available loss mitigation options”; “that
[d]efendants are required to meet certain requirements prior
to initiat[ing] any foreclosure action against [her]”;
”that any foreclosure proceedings are invalid”;
and “that [d]efendants have breached Fiduciary Duties
per Georgia Code § 11-3-307[.]” ([1.1] at 7 ¶
13).

B.
Procedural History

Plaintiff
filed an action in the Superior Court of Gwinnett County,
Georgia on June 29, 2017. ([1.1]). On September 13, 2017,
Nationstar filed a Notice of Removal [1] in this Court. On
September 15, 2017, Nationstar filed the instant Motion to
Dismiss [3]. Plaintiff failed to respond to Nationstar's
Motion, and it is deemed unopposed. See LR 7.1B,
NDGa. On January 25, 2018, Magistrate Judge Vineyard issued a
Final R&R. The Final R&R recommends that (1)
Plaintiff Melanie Tyler's (“Tyler”) claims
against Defendant Shapiro be dismissed without prejudice for
failure to effect service of process, (2) Defendant
Nationstar's Motion to Dismiss [3] be granted as to
Plaintiff's federal RESPA claim, (3) that the Court
decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over
Plaintiff's state law claims against Nationstar, and (4)
that the remaining state law claims be remanded to the
Superior Court of Gwinnett County, Georgia. ([6] at 28).
Plaintiff did not object to the Final R&R.

II.
DISCUSSION

A.
Legal Standards

1.
Review of a Magistrate Judge's R&R

After
conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or
modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681
F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S.
1112 (1983). Where, as here, no party objects to the R&R,
the Court conducts a plain error review of the record.
See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th
Cir. 1983).

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.